© 1999 by British Society for the Philosophy of Science
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Discussion. Losing your marbles in wavefunction collapse theories
Peter Lewis ([1997]) has recently argued that the wavefunction collapse theory of GRW (Chirardi, Rimini and Weber [1986]) can only solve the problem of wavefunction tails at the expense of predicting that arithmetic does not apply to ordinary macroscopic objects. More specifically, Lewis argues that the GRW theory must violate the enumeration principle: that 'if marble 1 is in the box and marble 2 is in the box and so on through marble n, then all n marbles are in the box' ([1997], p. 321). Ghirardi and Bassi ([1999]) have replied that it is meaningless to say that the enumeration principle is violated because the wavefunction Lewis uses to exhibit the violation cannot persist, according to the GRW theory, for more than a split second ([1999], p. 709). On the contrary, we argue that Lewis's argument survives Ghirardi and Bassi's criticism unscathed. We then go on to show that, while the enumeration principle can fail in the GRW theory, the theory itself guarantees that the principle can never be empirically falsified, leaving the applicability of arithmetical reasoning to both micro- and macroscopic objects intact.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  E. B. Davies Some Remarks on the Foundations of Quantum Theory Brit J Philos Sci, September 1, 2005; 56(3): 521 - 539. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|